Skip to main content
. 2017 Oct 16;8(1):1–10. doi: 10.1111/cob.12226

Table 3.

Health utility scores at baseline and 3 years plus estimated treatment difference for liraglutide 3.0 mg and placebo

Source data n Estimate
IWQOL‐Lite‐derived data
Mean SF‐6D estimate at baseline
Liraglutide 3.0 mg 1149 0.75
Placebo 572 0.74
Mean SF‐6D estimate at 3 years
Liraglutide 3.0 mg 1114 0.80
Placebo 517 0.78
ETD (95% CI) P‐value 1090/509 0.014 (0.008; 0.021) <0.0001
SF‐36‐derived data
Mean SF‐6D estimate at baseline
Liraglutide 3.0 mg 1162 0.76
Placebo 576 0.75
Mean SF‐6D estimate at 3 years
Liraglutide 3.0 mg 1117 0.78
Placebo 517 0.76
ETD (95% CI) P‐value 1104/514 0.014 (0.002; 0.025) <0.0182
Mean EQ‐5D estimate at baseline
Liraglutide 3.0 mg 1173 0.93
Placebo 579 0.92
Mean EQ‐5D estimate at 3 years
Liraglutide 3.0 mg 995 0.94
Placebo 470 0.93
ETD (95% CI) P‐value 993/469 0.007 (0.002; 0.013) <0.0116

Health utility scores were mapped from IWQOL‐Lite and SF‐36 data using established algorithms; Missing values post‐baseline were imputed using last observation carried forward. CI, confidence interval; EQ‐5D, European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions; ETD, estimated treatment difference (liraglutide 3.0 mg‐placebo); IWQOL, Impact of Weight on Quality of Life; SD, standard deviation; SF‐36, Short Form‐36 v2; SF‐6D, Short Form‐6D.